CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 823Climate variability and modelsClimate Change and GeoengineeringAtmospheric aerosols and clouds

Context for interpreting equilibrium climate sensitivity and transient climate response from the CMIP6 Earth system models

Open access
Meehl, Gerald A., Senior, Catherine A., Eyring, Veronika, Flato, Gregory, Lamarque, Jean-Francois, Stouffer, Ronald J., Taylor, Karl E., Schlund, Manuel·2020·Science Advances
DOI 10.1126/sciadv.aba1981PMC PMC7314520
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

A historical context is provided for interpreting the equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) and transient climate response (TCR).

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1126/sciadv.aba1981

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The range of equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) was 1.8 to 5.6 K in CMIP6 simulations, compared with 2.1 to 4.7 K in CMIP5.

    “The range of equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS), defined as the global mean surface air temperature change caused by a doubling of the atmospheric CO2 concentration, was 1.8 to 5.6 K in CMIP6 simulations, compared with 2.1 to 4.7 K in CMIP5”

    From Toward machine-assisted tuning avoiding the underestimation of uncertainty in climate change projections (2023) · cites this paper as [3]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 26

  1. [2]Cess R. D., Potter G. L., Blanchet J. P., Boer G. J., Ghan S. J., Kiehl J. T., Treut H. L. E., Li Z. X., Liang X. Z., Mitchell J. F., Morcrette J. J., Randall D. A., Riches M. R., Roeckner E., Schlese U., Slingo A., Taylor K. E., Washington W. M., Wetherald R. T., Yagai I., Interpretation of cloud-climate feedback as produced by 14 atmospheric general circulation models. Science 245, 513– 516 (1989). 17750262
  2. [5]J. F. B. Mitchell, S. Manabe, V. Meleshko, T. Tokioka, Equilibrium climate change and its implications for the future, in Climate Change: The IPCC Scientific Assessment, J. T. Houghton, G. J. Jenkins, J. J. Ephraums, Eds. (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, UK, 1990).
  3. [10]Knutti R., Rugenstein M. A. A., Feedbacks, climate sensitivity and the limits of linear models. Phil.Trans.R.Soc. A373, 20150146 (2015). 26438287
  4. [16]F. P. Bretherton, K. Bryan, J. D. Woods, Time-dependent greenhouse-gas-induced climate change, in Climate Change: The IPCC Scientific Assessment, J. T. Houghton, G. J. Jenkins, J. J. Ephraums, Eds. (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, UK, 1990).
  5. [17]W. L. Gates, et al., Climate modelling, climate prediction and model validation, in Climate Change 1992: The Supplementary Report to the IPCC Scientific Assessment, J. T. Houghton, B. A. Callander, S. K. Varney, Eds. (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, UK, 1992).
  6. [18]A. Kattenberg, F. Giorgi, H. Grassl, G. A. Meehl, J. F. B. Mitchell, R. J. Stoeffer, T. Tokioka, A. J. Weaver, T. M. L. Wigley, Climate models–projections of future climate, in Climate Change 1995, The Science of Climate Change: Contribution of Working Group I to the Second Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, J. T. Houghton, BL. G. Meira Filbo, B. A. Callander, N. Harris, A. Kattenberg, K. Maskell, Eds. (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1996), pp. 285–357.
  7. [20]U. Cubasch, G. A. Meehl, G. J. Boer, R. J. Stouffer, M. Dix, C. A. Senior, S. Raper, K. S. Yap, Projections of future climate change, in Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, J. T. Houghton, Y. Ding, D. J. Griggs, M. Noguer, P. van der Linden, X. Dai, K. Maskell, C. I. Johnson, Eds. (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2001), pp. 525–582.
  8. [21]G. A. Meehl, T. F. Stocker, W. D. Collins, P. Friedlingstein, T. Gaye, J. M. Gregory, A. Kitoh, R. Knutti, J. M. Murphy, A. Noda, S. C. B. Raper, I. G. Watterson, A. J. Weaver, Z. C. Zhao, Global Climate Projections, in Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, S. Solomon, D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K. B. Averyt, M. Tignor, H. L. Miller, Eds. (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 2007), pp. 747–845.
  9. [23]PALEOSENS Project Members, Making sense of palaeoclimate sensitivity. Nature 491, 683– 691 (2012). 23192145
  10. [24]Gregory J. M., Ingram W. J., Palmer M. A., Jones G. S., Stott P. A., Thorpe R. B., Lowe J. A., Johns T. C., Williams K. D., A new method for diagnosing radiative forcing and climate sensitivity. Geophys. Res. Lett. 31, L03205 (2004).
  11. [25]G. Flato, J. Marotzke, B. Abiodun, P. Braconnot, S. C. Chou, W. Collins, P. Cox, F. Driouech, S. Emori, V. Eyring, C. Forest, P. Gleckler, E. Guilyardi, C. Jakob, V. Kattsov, C. Reason, M. Rummukainen, Evaluation of climate models, in Climate Change 2013: The Physical Scientific Basis. Working Group I Contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, UK, 2013).
  12. [27]Eyring V., Bock L., Lauer A., Righi M., Schlund M., Andela B., Arnone E., Bellprat O., Brötz B., Caron L.-P., Carvalhais N., Cionni I., Cortesi N., Crezee B., Davin E., Davini P., Debeire K., de Mora L., Deser C., Docquier D., Earnshaw P., Ehbrecht C., Gier B. K., Gonzalez-Reviriego N., Goodman P., Hagemann S., Hardiman S., Hassler B., Hunter A., Kadow C., Kindermann S., Koirala S., Koldunov N. V., Lejeune Q., Lembo V., Lovato T., Lucarini V., Massonnet F., Müller B., Pandde A., Pérez-Zanón N., Phillips A., Predoi V., Russell J., Sellar A., Serva F., Stacke T., Swaminathan R., Torralba V., Vegas-Regidor J., von Hardenberg J., Weigel K., Zimmermann K., ESMValTool v2.0 – Extended set of large-scale diagnostics for quasi-operational and comprehensive evaluation of Earth system models in CMIP. Geosci. Model Dev. 10.5194/gmd-2019-291 (2020). · DOI
  13. [28]J. Hansen, A. Lacis, D. Rind, G. Russell, P. Stone, I. Fung, R. Ruedy, J. Lerner, Climate Sensitivity: Analysis of feedback mechanisms, in Climate Processes and Climate Sensitivity (American Geophysical Union, 1984), Geophysical Monograph Series, vol. 29, pp. 130–163.
  14. [29]Hansen J., Russell G., Lacis A., Fung I., Rind D., Stone P., Climate response times: Dependence on climate sensitivity and ocean mixing. Science 229, 857– 859 (1985). 17777925
  15. [33]Knutti R., Joos F., Müller S. A., Plattner G.-K., Stocker T. F., Probabilistic climate change projections for CO2 stabilization profiles. Geophys. Res. Lett. 32, L20707 (2005).
  16. [35]Friedrich T., Timmermann A., Tigchelaar M., Elison Timm O., Ganopolski A., Nonlinear climate sensitivity and its implications for future greenhouse warming. Sci. Adv. 2, e1501923 (2016). 28861462 PMC5569956
  17. [44]Sanderson B., Constraints on long term warming in a climate mitigation scenario. Earth Syst. Dynam. Discuss. 10.5194/esd-2019-82 (2020). · DOI
  18. [45]Sanderson B., Relating climate sensitivity indices to projection uncertainty. Earth Syst. Dynam. Discuss. 10.5194/esd-2019-77 (2019). · DOI
  19. [46]Kiehl J. T., Twentieth century climate model response and climate sensitivity. Geophys. Res. Lett. 34, L22710 (2007).
  20. [48]Dittus A. J., Hawkins E., Wilcox L. J., Sutton R., Smith C. J., Andrews M. B., Forster P. M., Sensitivity of historical climate simulations to uncertain aerosol forcing. Geophys. Res. Lett. 10.1029/2019GL085806 (2020). · DOI
  21. [50]Bodas-Salcedo A., Mulcahy J. P., Andrews T., Williams K. D., Ringer M. A., Field P. R., Elsaesser G. S., Strong dependence of atmospheric feedbacks on mixed-phase microphysics and aerosol-cloud interactions in HadGEM3. J. Adv. Model. Earth Syst. 11, 1735– 1758 (2019). 31598189 PMC6774284
  22. [52]Schmittner A., Urban N. M., Shakun J. D., Mahowald N. M., Clark P. U., Bartlein P. J., Mix A. C., Rosell-Melé A., Climate sensitivity estimated from temperature reconstructions of the Last Glacial Maximum. Science 334, 1385– 1388 (2011). 22116027
  23. [55]Schneider von Deimling T., Ganopolski A., Held H., Rahmstorf S., How cold was the Last Glacial Maximum? Geophys. Res. Lett. 33, L14709 (2006).
  24. [60]Tokarska K. B., Stolpe M. B., Sippel S., Fischer E. M., Smith C. J., Lehner F., Knutti R., Past warming trend constrains future warming in CMIP6 models. Sci. Adv. 6, eaaz9549 (2020). 32206725 PMC7080456
  25. [68]Mauritsen T., Bader J., Becker T., Behrens J., Bittner M., Brokopf R., Brovkin V., Claussen M., Crueger T., Esch M., Fast I., Fiedler S., Fläschner D., Gayler V., Giorgetta M., Goll D. S., Haak H., Hagemann S., Hedemann C., Hohenegger C., Ilyina T., Jahns T., Jimenéz-de-la-Cuesta D., Jungclaus J., Kleinen T., Kloster S., Kracher D., Kinne S., Kleberg D., Lasslop G., Kornblueh L., Marotzke J., Matei D., Meraner K., Mikolajewicz U., Modali K., Möbis B., Müller W. A., Nabel J. E. M. S., Nam C. C. W., Notz D., Nyawira S.-S., Paulsen H., Peters K., Pincus R., Pohlmann H., Pongratz J., Popp M., Raddatz T. J., Rast S., Redler R., Reick C. H., Rohrschneider T., Schemann V., Schmidt H., Schnur R., Schulzweida U., Six K. D., Stein L., Stemmler I., Stevens B., Storch J.-S., Tian F., Voigt A., Vrese P., Wieners K.-H., Wilkenskjeld S., Winkler A., Roeckner E., Developments in the MPI-M Earth System Model version 1.2 (MPI-ESM1.2) and its response to increasing CO2. J. Adv. Model. Earth Syst. 11, 998– 1038 (2019). PMC7386935 32742553
  26. [69]Wyser K., van Noije T., Yang S., von Hardenberg J., O’Donnell D., Döscher R., On the increased climate sensitivity in the EC-Earth model from CMIP5 to CMIP6. Geophys. Model Dev. 10.5194/gmd-2019-282 (2020). · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Meehl, G. A., Senior, C. A., Eyring, V., Flato, G., Lamarque, J.-F., Stouffer, R. J., Taylor, K. E., & Schlund, M.
Affiliations
  • NSF National Center for Atmospheric Research (US)
  • Met Office (GB)
  • University of Bremen (DE)
  • Environment and Climate Change Canada (CA)
  • National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO, USA.
  • University of Arizona (US)
  • Program for Climate Model Diagnosis and Intercomparison (US)
  • Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt e. V. (DLR) (DE)
Corresponding author
Meehl, Gerald A.
ORCID
Venue
Science Advances
Publisher
American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)
Published
2020-06-26
Volume
6
Issue
26
Pages
eaba1981-eaba1981
ISSN
2375-2548 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1126/sciadv.aba1981
PMC
PMC7314520
OpenAlex
W3037496774
Cited by
823
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 77 · 2025: 121 · 2024: 166 · 2023: 140 · 2022: 149 · 2021: 147 · 2020: 23
FWCI
6.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
  • Science Advances (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • elib (German Aerospace Center) (acceptedVersion)
  • OSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (Cooperative Agreement No. 1852977)
  • U.S. Department of Energy (via National Science Foundation IA 1844590 and under Contract DE-AC52-07NA27344 to Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Climate variability and models
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Climate Change and Geoengineering
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Atmospheric aerosols and clouds
Keywords
equilibrium climate sensitivity, transient climate response, CMIP6, Earth system models, cloud feedback, aerosol-cloud interactions, climate sensitivity uncertainty

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review